Many celebrities are vocal in matters of social concern in the present generation. Despite its pros and cons, being vocal is to be appreciated for a celebrity's voice is louder and wider. As far as actor Suriya is concerned, he has been into educating rural children for more than a decade now. Not only serving to the needs of rural school children, his foundation "Agaram" has been supporting higher educational needs of needy children, particularly girls. Having been a volunteer in an NGO a decade ago, I have personally witnessed Agaram's interest in rural children and education. Since then, I have heard a lot of first hand information from the beneficiaries themselves. Since his venture, the foundation and the actor have been reacting and responding to the matters concerning education, be it NEP or NEET.
Now his official statement has invited unexpected response from the Judiciary, criminal contempt. REASON: In addition to many of his concerns in the statement, he made a mention that (not verbatim)"when Judiciary conducts its proceedings online fearing lives due to Covid-19, it directs candidates to appear for exam without fear".
So now how does it amount to (criminal)contempt of court??
The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 gives courts the power to restrict fundamental right to personal liberty in terms of expressing one's opinion in forms such as written or spoken words, signs and actions. Disobeying court's order is referred to as civil contempt whereas "scandalizing" or "lowering" the authority of the courts and its orders amounts to criminal contempt. The latter also includes interference in judicial matters or obstructing the same. There are several articles that reiterate contempt of court such as Article 129, Article 142 (2) and Article 215.
In short, the criminal contempt refers to all those cases that make allegations on Judiciary, have motives to make public lose faith on it or give unwarranted criticisms.
In such circumstances, how is actor Suriya's statement is contempt of court?
I invite all your attention to the fact that even while unlocking of nation and Tamil Nadu gradually began, courts remained closed. Slowly, electronic means of filing and proceedings was happening. Courts are yet to be fully opened or accessible despite the fact the advocates from moderate to poor backgrounds have already switched over to jobs such as vegetable sellers, fruit sellers, daily wage farmers and the like. Though the sheer survival of advocates was/is shaken, courts refused to open stating the fear of Covid-19 spread.
Given this fact, Actor Suriya has just made a "fair statement" or "accurate reporting" of what the courts said and how the courts act in this pandemic period. It very well fits into the domain of "What is not a contempt of court". If at all there is an issue for the Justice to raise this matter, it has to be the ego attached which enjoys the privilege of "independent authority". May be the comparison between the "learned judges"/"chief justices" and the common people did not go well and led to this controversy.
Interestingly, the very next day a group of retired judges and senior advocates jumped in support of Actor Suriya and the need to not probe further for various reasons. One state that it has to be treated and ignored as over-reaction of an artiste and the other say it has to be looked within the context and not beyond. At the same time, there is a group that condemns his statement.
However it goes, as a layperson I find nothing controversial in the statement, rather it voices the minds of many. Banning NEET or scrapping NEET in view of tragic incidents happening is beyond this post. Yet, there is always an imperative need for a space to discuss, deliberate and express one's dissent. The very constitution guarantees the right to expression, the basic need for democracy and it has to be safeguarded by the Judiciary themselves. What actor Suriya did has nowhere "scandalizes", "intervenes" or "obstructs" the judiciary system. When a layperson like me puts all these facts together, the actor's opinion has to be taken in the right sense of venting frustration and helplessness for the children who not only go through tough preparations (with a failed education system that is unfair to majority) but also fight the pandemic risking lives. It is just that when opinions get voiced by a celebrity, the reach is far and sometimes end up controversial for no valid reason. Personally, I do not see a reason for actor Suriya to do this for publicity.
Similar contempt of court recently happened in the case of Prashant Bhushan. He refused to apologize stating that it would be against his conscience and he stood by his stance. Mere expression of one's opinion with a conscious mind cannot and should not be treated as contempt in a democratic system. Even England has done away with this system to a significant extent where India has taken this precedence from.
The country lacks voices and those that are heard are strangled every now and then. The least we all could do is to have a healthy discussion and dialogue wherever and however possible. In those cases, even such celebrity's view point would serve as a starter.
P.S.: Neither am I a fan of the actor in discussion nor do I have any connection with his foundation. And thanks for the inputs received from advocates Yogeshwaran and Mahalakshmi.
